WRITTEN QUESTION E-0916/02 by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Reform of the Council.
Date: 2002-04-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Council, institutional reform, operation of the Institutions

C 309 E/58

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

rather than merely waiting for the rule to come into operation whereby they lapse after a certain period?
Can the Commission estimate how the situation with regard to RAL will develop between 2002 and 2006?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2002)

The total amount of outstanding commitments (RAL for differentiated appropriations) has indeed increased
substantially during 2001 (cid:1) from EUR 65,6 billion in the beginning of the year to EUR 86,8 billion at the
end of the year, i.e., by EUR 21,2 billion (preliminary figures).

The main reason for this increase is the new system with ‘automatic’ commitments for the Structural Funds
since 2000. At the beginning of each year, the entire amount of the annual programme allocations for the
Structural Funds is directly entered into the accounts as commitments. These commitments are then
consumed by advance payments and reimbursements of costs occurred by the Member States in
the volume of
implementing the Structural Funds’ programmes. Both in 2000 and in 2001,
reimbursements was quite modest, as Member States have so far presented only a limited number of
such claims. Accordingly, the RAL for the Structural Funds increased in 2001 from EUR 32,9 billion to
EUR 50,2 billion, i.e., with EUR 17,3 billion. This explains more than 80 % of the total increase in the RAL.

The other reasons for an increase in the RAL relate mainly to the Cohesion Fund (+ EUR 1,1 billion),
Internal Policies (+ EUR 1,0 billion) and the Pre-accession Aid (+ EUR 1,8 billion). The latter is mainly due
to the start up phase of the new ISPA and Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural
Development (Sapard) programmes. For external actions, the volume of RAL did not increase during 2001,
and that for the first time.

In accordance with the Joint Declaration of November 2001, as part of the 2002 budget procedure, the
Commission will particularly focus on managing the RAL that is more than five years old and/or without
payments in the last two years. A part of this potentially abnormal RAL is unjustified, and should be
de-committed, thus reducing the overall outstanding RAL. The Commission will establish an action plan in
order to examine some 16 000 commitments, which add up to EUR 11,7 billion. The Commission will
provide the first report to the Budget Authority in June 2002, to be followed up by regular progress
reports, on a number of selected budget lines, as specified by the Budget Authority.

implementation of

For the period until 2006, the evolution of the RAL will depend decisively on the pace of the Member
States’
for this.
It
Nevertheless, the Commission is improving the annual forecasting in co-operation with the Member States,
aiming at more realistic budgeting. The Structural Funds’ new regulations with a system of ‘automatic’
de-commitments in cases where Member States have not made use of their programme allocations within
a time-limit will also stabilise the RAL for the Structural Funds.

is still premature to provide a forecast

the Structural Funds.

(2002/C 309 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0916/02

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(5 April 2002)

Subject: Reform of the Council

At the Barcelona summit the leaders of the 15 Member States decided, on the basis of proposals made by
the Secretary-General of the Council, Mr Solana, that a team of special representatives of the leaders of the
Member States would draw up a document on the forthcoming reforms of the Council.

Will the Council state the purpose of this document which will be drawn up by the team of special
representatives of the Member States and say what relation there is between this document and the
European Assembly?

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/59

Reply

(3 October 2002)

The European Council embarked upon a process of reform at Helsinki in December 1999, when it adopted
a set of recommendations, and then in Göteborg and Barcelona, where it took note of the reports from the
Secretary-General/High Representative,
the
General Affairs Council, the Presidency of the Council, and the legislative activity of the Council and
transparency.

focusing on four main subjects:

the European Council,

The European Council instructed the Presidency, in close cooperation with the Council Secretary-General,
to make all appropriate contacts with the members of the European Council and with the correspondents
they nominated, with a view to submitting a report to the Seville European Council proposing specific
measures for adoption. The report was examined by the Council in the context of preparations for the
Seville European Council.

In the light of a summary report accompanied by detailed proposals, the European Council meeting in
Seville held a detailed discussion on the subject and gave its agreement to a series of specific measures
applicable, without amendment of the Treaties, to the organisation and functioning of the European
Council.

The Council would refer the Honourable Member to paragraphs 3 to 7 of the Seville European Council
conclusions and to Annexes I and II which give an exhaustive list of the decisions taken by the Heads of
State or Government.

(2002/C 309 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0923/02

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(5 April 2002)

Subject: Transporting of deceased persons within the European Union

The transporting of deceased persons within the European Union is currently regulated by the 1937 Berlin
Arrangement and the Council of Europe’s 1973 Strasbourg Agreement. These provisions appear
problematic for several reasons, since they do not adequately take account of the European Economic
Area; they furthermore cause considerable expense because formalities are inadequately standardised and
the use of specific facilities is mandatory (e.g. zinc-lined coffins).

It is difficult to explain to the bereaved, for instance, that deceased persons may be transported right across
Austria without a zinc-lined coffin whereas such coffins are mandatory for transport between Salzburg and
Freilassing, which are only 10 km apart.

Can the Commission indicate what measures can be taken to ensure that it is no more difficult to transport
deceased persons across borders than it is to do so within a Member State?

(2002/C 309 E/068)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0935/02

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 April 2002)

Subject: Cross-border repatriation of deceased persons within the EU

The repatriation of persons who have died in a country other than their country of origin is regulated
within the EU by the Berlin Convention (1937) and the Strasbourg Convention drawn up by the Council
of Europe in 1973. These arrangements no longer make sense, however, since they assume the existence of
border controls and fail to take account of the establishment of a European Economic Area. In addition,
these arrangements entail considerable costs attributable partly to the absence of standardised formalities
and partly to the prescribed products (zinc-lined coffins). It is impossible to explain to the surviving
relatives that a deceased person can be transported, for example, from Vienna to Bregenz (510 km)